A lot of people look for the magic home loan hack.

Weekly repayments, fortnightly repayments, offset tricks, redraw strategies, credit card points, some bloke on the internet selling a course with a whiteboard and too much confidence.

Some of these things can help, but the basic mechanic is usually much simpler than people think.

A home loan is basically a massive negative account.

You owe the bank money. Your repayments push the balance down. The bank charges interest, which pushes the balance back up.

For most standard home loans, interest is calculated daily and charged monthly. That means the bank is generally looking at your loan balance each day, calculating interest on that balance, then charging the interest monthly.

So the whole game is pretty simple:

https://preview.redd.it/vjufoki64g2h1.png?width=1536&format=png&auto=webp&s=7d254a21f57e0ec34dc861f47e004d46889f6ea0

How do you keep the effective balance lower each day?

That’s what extra repayments do. That’s what offset accounts do. That’s what putting money into the loan sooner does. That’s what keeping repayments higher after a refinance can do.

They are all just different ways of attacking the daily interest calculation.

Where first home buyers often get stuck is thinking there are separate buckets. They ask things like, “Can I pay the interest first?” or “Can I make my repayment go to principal?”

On a normal principal and interest loan, that’s usually the wrong mental model.

Think of it more like a bill. The bank has calculated a minimum repayment that should clear the loan over the loan term, usually 30 years. You make the repayment, the loan balance comes down. The bank charges interest, the balance goes back up a bit.

At the start, the balance is huge, so the interest charge is huge. That means more of your repayment is effectively covering interest, and less of it is reducing the loan.

Later, as the balance gets smaller, the interest charge gets smaller, so more of the same repayment starts attacking the actual debt.

That’s why home loans feel painfully slow at the start. It’s not because there is some mysterious “interest first” bucket. It’s just because the balance is big.

This is also why offset accounts are useful.

If you have a $600,000 loan and $50,000 sitting in offset, the bank is effectively calculating interest as though you owe $550,000. Your repayment usually does not drop, but the interest charged should be lower, which means more of your repayment can go towards reducing the loan.

Again, not magic. Just less interest charged, more principal paid down.

This is also why I think people sometimes overrate the weekly vs fortnightly vs monthly repayment conversation.

If you do not have an offset, paying money into the loan earlier can help because the balance drops earlier. But if your income and savings are already sitting in an offset account, that benefit is already mostly happening. The money is already reducing the daily interest calculation.

At that point, the bigger question is not really “am I paying weekly or fortnightly?”

It’s whether you’re actually keeping surplus money against the loan, or just moving money around and spending it anyway.

That’s where people get caught. They make extra repayments, then redraw constantly. They refinance to a lower rate, but reset the loan back to 30 years and drop the repayment. They get a pay rise, but the whole pay rise quietly disappears into lifestyle creep.

The boring stuff usually does most of the work:

• keep spare cash in offset if you have one
• pay more than the minimum where your budget allows
• don’t redraw unless you actually mean to
• be careful resetting the loan term
• keep the effective loan balance lower for as long as possible

TL;DR: Building usually isn’t one giant loan that magically appears on Day 1. You’re generally buying land first, then progressively drawing down the construction loan over time as the house gets built. The repayments usually start smaller, then slowly increase during the build. Most of the stress comes from timing, cashflow and all the little costs people don’t think about upfront.

I've seen a surge in interest in 'new' because of the proposed tax changes, a lot of which is about house and land. So, this is for the first home buyers (and honestly plenty of upgraders or investors too) that haven't done construction finance before.

The biggest thing to understand is that you’re usually doing TWO separate things. You're buying land, then building a house afterwards under a separate construction contract. Even if the builder markets it nicely as a “house and land package”.

So let’s use rough numbers:

• Land = $360k
• Build contract = $400k
• Total package = $760k
• Loan amount = $684k (90% LVR).
• First assumption = no LMI.
  • Yes. I know there would be LMI normally for a 90% loan... but I'm just trying to make the maths easy for the sake of education.
• Second assumption = buying in QLD.

Here’s the bit people don’t realise: the bank does NOT show up to land settlement with the full $684k. The lender usually holds the build funds back for later construction stages.

So at land settlement, maybe only ~$284k of the bank’s money is actually being used toward the land purchase itself, while the future construction funds remain undrawn in the background waiting for the build to happen. This means...

You need to be prepared to pay your ENTIRE shortfall at land settlement. In this case, that's something like $92k if you're buying in QLD and you're NOT a first home buyer.

Example summary of the costs involved to purchase and settle.

With construction:-

1. You settle the land first (some people pay the build deposit up front with cash, but make sure this doesn't screw with your shortfall at land settlement)
2. Build deposit of 5%
3. Slab of 10%
4. Frame of 15%
5. Lockup of 35%
6. Fixing of 25%
7. Practical Complation of 10%

Here's how the process works:-

1. Builder sends invoice.
2. You sign off.
3. Bank releases that stage payment.
   1. Some payments require an inspection - depends on the bank and the state you're building in.
4. That cycle just repeats itself for months. Usually 3-6 months in most of Australia, aside from WA which in my experience takes closer to 9-12 months.

And this is why repayments during construction usually start smaller and gradually increase as more of the loan gets drawn down. It's usually interest-only, to ease the cashflow burden... then becomes principal & interest at a certain point - usually a timeframe after land settlement or after you move into the home.

Example of how loan repayments become larger, over time, as the build progresses.

By practical completion, the loan is mostly or fully drawn and the repayments start looking much more like a “normal” mortgage.

I think this is where some people accidentally get themselves into trouble.

Because they qualify comfortably at the START of the process, but don’t mentally prepare for what things look like 8-12 months later when:

• repayments grow as more of the loan is drawn on
• rates may have changed (increase), if you're on variable
• rent is still being paid on your current property
• site costs blew out
• variations got added
• construction got delayed

And unfortunately… delays aren’t exactly rare these days.

Another thing people don’t always realise is that building can sometimes reduce upfront stamp duty compared to buying established, because in many states the duty is mostly being assessed on the LAND purchase first, not the future unbuilt house.

Specific bit for first home buyers - because you can get benefits

Depending on state policies and price caps, there can sometimes also be:

1. stamp duty concessions (complete waivers, if not significant discounts)
2. grants (e.g. $30k in QLD if buying under $750k, $15k in SA)
3. other incentives for building new homes (e.g. if in future you're thinking it might become an investment, you're might be considering the future negative gearing eligibility)

If you combine a lot of benefits (e.g. discounted, or no, stamp duty + a construction grant) you might be in a position to save a significant amount compared to established.

Examples of cost differences in QLD if purchasing a $760k property as established, new home, or first new home.

But personally, I always think people should treat grants as “nice money later”, not “money we absolutely need at settlement so we can do this thing". Because timing matters, and grants don’t always arrive when people expect them to. They can be applied at land settlement, sure, but they can also land at slab, or way later in construction.

One thing I'd recommend considering, if you have the borrowing power, is a proper turnkey contracts. Because people MASSIVELY underestimate how much stuff still exists outside the basic build contract. Things like:

• fencing
• landscaping
• driveway
• blinds
• aircon
• retaining walls

People get to completion thinking “Awesome, the house is done" and then suddenly realise they still need another $60k+ just to make the place fully functional and liveable. That took long enough to prepare to buy the house - how long is it now going to take to save for it?

A proper turnkey build can reduce a lot of that stress because more of those items are included upfront inside the original contract and loan structure from Day 1. Yes, the total contract price can look a bit higher initially and you may not want to pay interest on it - but sometimes that’s actually safer from a cashflow perspective than scrambling for extra money later after your savings buffer already got chewed up during construction.

One other thing worth mentioning quickly: valuations can occasionally become messy with builds too. Construction costs move around (usually up) and valuers sometimes see things differently and don't think the market's changed that much. Also, the builder might hit you with a price increase if it's been a long time (>3 months) since they gave you a quote.

So buffers matter more with builds than people realise, especially if you're buying off the plan and you're waiting many months before land registration is expected to occur.

Hi all, wanting to get clarification on the max income portion of the Help to buy scheme.
I’ve seen the figure on your NOA referenced various times on the housing Aus website but wondering if Salary sacrifices to super (for FHSS purposes) would count towards this $100k?
NOA doesn’t show these contributions (which would bring me under $100k) but I saw it mentioned as being counted in the Aus Gov ‘Help to Buy Scheme Customer Guide’

Hi, brokers.

[Mods: Hopefully this one doesn't cause you to swing the Ban Hammer. LOL. If so, that'd be a shame, but before you start winding up, please hear me out]

There was a question on this sub a couple of months ago along the lines of "C'mon, for real now... do you always recommend the best option to the client?" I can't find that post now, but I seem to recall some brokers weighing in, saying the consequences of doing so (in the event of an audit) just aren't worth it.

I have no doubt that's true.

The thing is, though, there have always been penalties in place in the financial services industry for all kinds of malfeasance; ain't stopped people doing it anyway. Seems some people (not just in financial services, either) are willing to take the risk of being fined or having their licence revoked or whatever the case may be if... maybe... someday... possibly... they might get audited... if they're unlucky.

So how can I know if a broker is actually being honest with me when the incentives are so clearly misaligned?

For the record, lest you think I'm some kind of raging socialist, I'm not. Nor do I have any automatic dislike of salespeople. Really. I've worked with superb salespeople who listen and ask questions to determine whether they can help a prospect... and then, if so, how best to do that. Sometimes, they even say "I can't help you". This is what all the best salespeople do the world over.

Sadly, I've also seen too many people taken advantage of when the informational imbalance tips disproportionately in the salesperson's favour. That is, when a prospect knows there's a lot they don't know and because of this seeks the advice and guidance of a professional. Unscrupulous salespeople seem to approach this situation like the wolf in those old Looney Tunes cartoons, drooling while mentally sharpening a carving knife.

So I suppose what I'm asking is:

• In the case of working with a mortgage broker, what are some things I can do to increase the likelihood of finding someone who's in it for the win-win?

I'm no spring chicken so I reckon I can get a read on the ones with the ick-factor or who are all crocodile smiles. That's not the issue. What I'd love is some tips for being able to see through the BS of the salespeople in this arena who talk the talk, but actually don't give a shit about me. I can do it in other arenas, but I have close to zero experience dealing with mortgage brokers so what should I look out for? What should I ask? See... I don't even really know how to pose my bloody question!

Hi,

Just wondering if anyone has experience with lenders that are more favourable towards borrowing capacity for employees of non-for-profit organisations who salary package.

I currently work for a NFP and salary package approximately $18k per year in living expenses. This increases my actual take-home pay quite a bit, but because it reduces my taxable income, some borrowing calculators/lenders seem to assess me lower than what I actually earn/spend.

Are there lenders/brokers that properly factor in:

salary packaging benefits,

FBT exempt benefits,

or adjusted net income

when calculating borrowing capacity?

Any help would be great.

Hi everyone! My partner and I finished our cert 4 however, was wondering couple of things.

- honestly we aren't looking to do it full- time but as a side hustle and after finding out we pay around $1000/ month including mentor and aggregator per person, which is $2k for both of us we are starting to think how it's going to pan out.

- this would be about $25k expenses with 20% cut from aggregator and 2 years of clawback (100% in first year and 50%in second year)

We wanted to get started on this because we want something outside of our FT however, after knowing this I'm looking for genuine advice.

These are speciality/niche financers which serve a religious market.
Thanks

19m
living in the gc

i have 5k in savings split with my girlfriend ( we only started saving recently)

i make about 50-60k a year and so does my girlfriend

i want to try and use the help to buy scheme considering nothing in my area is under the 700-800 mark

i think im rushing into trying to buy bc im still living at home and dont want to rent

should i speak to a mortgage broker and start looking to buy or should i wait for “the right time” and start searching then with a bit more saved and maybe a higher income for us both?

Not very familiar about buying and a long way from that so I am only trying to understand one aspect of it, not looking for specific advice.

I might be looking to buy a cheap 1bedroom Melbourne CBD apartment a year from now, let's say 400k cost, first home buyer, to live in as primary and only place.

Looking at some calculations made by the computer, let's say you have 100k, it seems that paying minimum deposit and putting the rest in an offset while growing that is way better than using most of it on a deposit? (No LMI if I go with ubank).

Better, as in with a bigger offset and minimum deposits you pay the loan years faster than a bigger deposit and no or tiny offset.

From what I understand, offset is an additional reduction of loan's interest on top of your home loan debt repayments, which based on the loan's interest rate so higher than hisa. In a sense, the bank you got the loan from gets to hold the money in their institution, is this that such big of a deal for banks?

My question is, is this actually correct? Are offsets + minimum deposit that much better than other options if your goal is to pay the loan the fastest?

28 year old on 130k a year with no debts or dependents looking to buy an apartment around the $480k mark would be my first property purchase. Is this feasible not having the 20% deposit and will I be hit with LMI or will the government scheme work for an apartment and is this loan feasible? FYI my savings are more like $60k but I’d like to have about $7500 for some furniture and $7500 for moving and other building pest inspections transfer fees etc plus a few thousand left over. Thankyou.

Self-employed income is probably where I see the biggest gap between how borrowers see their income and how banks see it.

The classic one I hear is: “I pay myself a wage from my company, so I’m PAYG, right?”

Sort of. But not always.

If you own the business, the bank knows you control both sides of the equation. You are not the same as someone working for Woolies, BHP, Queensland Health, etc. You might pay yourself a wage, but the bank still wants to know whether the business can actually support that wage.

That is the big difference.

For a normal employee, the bank is mostly asking, “Are they employed, and what are they paid?”

For a self-employed borrower, the bank is asking, “Does the business actually make enough money, and has it done that for long enough?”

That does not mean self-employed borrowers cannot get loans. Plenty do. It just means the income usually needs more explaining.

There are a few broad ways lenders can assess it.

1. Director’s salary

This is usually the easiest version when it works.

You own the company, pay yourself a regular wage, and the lender is happy to use that wage without needing to fully rely on the business profit.

But there usually needs to be some history behind it. You generally cannot just start paying yourself $200k right before applying and expect the bank to treat it like a normal salary.

The lender wants to see that the wage is real, consistent, and supportable. When this works, happy days. It can keep the application much cleaner.

2. Basic self-employed assessment

This is where a lender may mainly look at your personal tax returns and notices of assessment.

A simple version might be using the average of the last two years of personal income. This can work well where the personal income tells a clean story and we do not need to dig too deeply into company or trust financials.

But it can also be limiting if the business structure is more complicated.

3. Full self-employed assessment

This is where the books get opened.

Personal tax returns, company tax returns, trust returns, profit and loss, balance sheets, business debts, add-backs, distributions, wages, retained profits, the whole thing.

The bank is basically trying to work out what income is actually available to the borrower.

That can include wages paid to you, business profit, and certain paper expenses that may be added back. But it is not as simple as “my business turned over $900k, so I earn $900k.”

Turnover is not income. Profit matters. Structure matters. Debt matters. How the money flows matters.

The biggest mistakes I see

The first mistake is assuming that because you pay yourself a wage, the bank will treat you exactly like a normal PAYG employee. Sometimes they can. Sometimes they will not.

The second mistake is assuming the best year is automatically the year the bank will use. Some lenders can look at one year in isolation. Some want two years. Some average. Some take the lower year. Policy matters a lot here.

The third mistake is forgetting about business debts. Some lenders may include business debts in servicing. Some may be more willing to exclude them if the business is clearly paying them. That one policy difference can change borrowing capacity by a lot.

The fourth mistake is thinking tax minimisation and borrowing capacity always like each other. They often do not.

A lot of self-employed people are very good at reducing taxable income. Fair enough. But then when they apply for a home loan, the bank looks at the taxable income and says, “Cool, this is what we can verify.”

That is where people get caught out.

TLDR

Self-employed lending is not automatically harder. It is just less automatic.

A PAYG employee might only need payslips and a quick employment check. A self-employed borrower usually needs the story to make sense.

How long has the business been running? Is the income stable? Is this year better or worse than last year? Are there company debts? Are there trusts involved? Is the borrower paying themselves wages, taking distributions, leaving profit in the company, or a mix of everything?

That is why two self-employed borrowers earning “the same amount” can get very different outcomes.

It is also why two lenders can give very different borrowing capacity numbers for the exact same client.

The main thing is not just asking, “How much do I earn?”

It is asking, “What income can the bank actually use?”

I hope this helps clarify a few things, but self-employed policy gets specific very quickly, so it's hard to apply a one-size-fits-all rule.

24 based in Sydney currently working in mortgage broking and looking for some career advice from experienced brokers/finance people.

Background:

• 3 years AML/transaction monitoring at CBA + NAB/UBank
• Since Oct 2025 working at a brokerage doing loan writing/broker support
• Heavy exposure to self-employed and complex lending scenarios, lender policy, submissions, valuations, MIRs etc
• Current brokerage mainly deals with SME/business-owner clients

Issue is lead flow has slowed down massively with the current market. Lots of clients are already refinanced, servicing is tight and many scenarios are ending up in private/non-conforming space handled by senior guys.

I’ve now been approached by another business offering an ABN/self-employed broker setup:

• warm exclusive builder/property purchase leads (around 3/week)
• mentorship/support
• 50/50 split
• monthly fees
• work from home/flexible

The operator is experienced and transparent.

Questions:

1. Does this sound like a solid opportunity?
2. What red flags I should be thinking about?
3. Is trying to do both roles at once even realistically/legal/compliance-wise possible in broking?
4. If you were early in your broking career again, would you prioritise lead flow/sales reps or staying in a more technically complex environment longer?

I completed a pre approval for a couple about 8 to 10 months ago. Since then, they signed an off the plan land contract. I have spent approximately 15 to 20 hours assisting them through multiple discussions, structuring options, lender updates, and ongoing guidance.

Now they want me to arrange the land loan. However, they have also indicated that they intend to sell the land immediately after settlement. Most likely because they are getting good returns.

As you know, this would likely result in a 100% clawback.I have never charged clients directly for my service. I have contacted my compliance team to confirm whether charging a fee in this scenario is permitted.

I have informed the clients that if the land is sold within 12 months, I may need to charge a service fee. Otherwise, they are free to proceed with other places ( still 50% will go )

I understand brokers are paid by lenders, but situations like this raise questions about protecting our time and business sustainability.

How would you handle this situation?

• Would you proceed with the loan?

• Would you charge a fee?

• How do you manage clawback risk in similar cases?

Appreciate genuine industry feedback.

With the Federal Budget confirming that negative gearing will be strictly limited to new builds starting July 1, 2027, the rules state that any established property purchased after 7:30 PM on May 12, 2026, will have its tax deductions completely cut off when the deadline hits next year. Only properties bought before budget night are grandfathered indefinitely. Since the announcement last Tuesday, are you seeing an immediate panic from investors trying to rush through contracts to get that one year of tax grace, or has the announcement completely frozen investor interest in established dwellings?

We’ve just entered the market unexpectedly, I think we’re in a fairly good position but I have nagging doubts as our expenditures are going to rapidly rise as soon as we commit. I suppose that’s an anxiety all first home buyers face, but our rent is currently well below means and I think we lucked out in that front.

Combined income is roughly $180k per annum, as I do quite a bit of paid overtime which fluctuates month to month, but base take home would be just under $5k a fortnight combined.

We currently have $110k in savings, and have been gifted $50k more. I have some investments I don’t want to touch at about $7k, and a credit card with a $6k limit.
My partner has no debt other than HECS at around $27k.

Realistically what can we afford in inner west Sydney without maxing ourself out and putting ourselves in financial distress? We’re hoping to make use of the first home buyer scheme and at least having a stamp duty concession in NSW.

I appreciate it’s a bit of a vague question but I am worried that I’ll be living on rice and beans for the next few years and I want some pragmatic advice.

TLDR: There’s no magic trick. Most “pay your mortgage off fast” strategies are just a combination of paying more (extra repayments), reducing interest (via offset or redraw), using equity intelligently (debt-recycling to buy an investment property) and staying disciplined for a long time. That’s basically it.

We've all seen online the companies that charge a fee to attend a course or seminar that so you can “beat the bank” or “pay off your mortgage in 7-10 years”.

In my opinion... most of the core concepts are pretty simple and should be freely available - so, here they are. If you're considering making a big change and want expert guidance and support, then maybe talk to a professional if you want help navigating it.

First I'll give a graph and summary that explains the benefit-over-time of four different combinations, so you can see what they each look like. Then I'll explain each of the methods in a bit more detail.

https://preview.redd.it/4jcw4xl6871h1.png?width=2666&format=png&auto=webp&s=bb82c003c017cdb6660a9ada731d6849a0985ca8

1. Switch from monthly to fortnightly repayments (deliberately scheduled extra repayments)

If your repayment is $3,000/month, then “true fortnightly” repayments would be $1,500 every 2 weeks. Because there are 26 fortnights in a year, you effectively make 26 x $1,500 = $39,000 in repayments. When compared to the monthly, which is 12 x $3,000 = $36,000 in repayments - it's like you're paying for 13 months instead of 12.

That extra repayment each year attacks the principal earlier, which reduces future interest calculations. On a normal 30-year mortgage, this alone can shave roughly 4 to 6 years off the loan and save a massive amount of interest.

Not because the bank changed your rate, but because you paid extra earlier.

2. Build redraw or offset aggressively (making repayments more effective)

I did a post recently (here) that explains how every dollar sitting in offset (or paid early into redraw) makes each repayment you make allocate more of your dollars to paying down the principal loan amount, rather than the interest. This starts compounding on itself over time and effectively snowballs.

Some people (like me) build up the offset, or redraw, by dumping in savings from tax returns, deliberately directing salary into the offset account, paying bonuses into redraw or offset, and in general just trying to keep minimal cash outside the loan.

The more consistently you do this, the faster things move. If you’re disciplined enough, this can take another 5 - 10 years off the loan, depending on how aggressive you are.

3. If you struggle to save, force the discipline (refinance deliberately to a shorter loan term)

Not everyone is naturally good with offset, redraw or general savings behaviours. Some people see $40k sitting there and slowly spend it - holidays, toys, home upgrades, cars... we've all done it. No judgement here.

But if you are worried about your discipline and discretionary spending, one option is to refinance to a much shorter loan term. The traditional timeframe for a loan is around 30 years, but you could refinance to maybe 20, 15, or even 10 years.

This massively increases the minimum repayment and kind of forces you to smash down principal whether you feel motivated or not.

WARNING: This is not suitable for everyone, as many people may need a savings buffer in their lives to be ready to handle emergencies and if they're on lower incomes it might be tough - but for high-income earners who are prone to discretional or impulse spending it can work very well.

4. The “investment property accelerator” strategy

A lot of those companies who 'sell the cource' also recommend or are involved in the purchase of an investment property. Sometimes they get a benefit (i.e. commission or referral payment) from this, sometimes they don't - you should probably ask that question when you speak to them.

The strategy can work very well in the right circumstances, but here's a simplified version:

1. Buy investment property
2. Wait for growth
3. Sell in 7-10 years time after a 'doubling' cycle
4. Use proceeds to wipe down PPOR debt

But you need to consider the holding costs over that 7-10 years and whether or not it'll get in the way of the first two ideas mentioned above. This is not a “2-year hack”, it's a long-term committment (like any investment strategy should be) and it it really only works if you bought well, held long enough, and your cashflow survives the ride.

5. Some people go even harder (and sell off assets)

Some companies like to recommend that people sell unnecessary cars, liquidate non-income producing assets (or toys that absorb a lot of cash - like boats), strip spending right back with disciplined budgets, and then throw every spare dollar (including sale proceed) into the mortgage.

And yes - mathematically, smashing principal early works incredibly well. Obviously.

But personally, I think there’s a balance and an element of not wanting to sacrifice your whole lifestyle... unless you really, really want to. A lot of my clients say they still want, or need, things like emergency savings, quality of life (especially with kids), flexibility, breathing room, etc.

IN SUMMARY, my views on this are...

The basics of it aren't too difficult (I hope, after this explanation), but you just need to combine them all together in the way that suits you best. Being mortgage-free at 40 sounds great, but being completely burnt out in the process of getting there maybe isn’t. Make sure that when you're planning this out with your partner (if you have one) that everyone's on board and they agree that the benefits are worth the changes/sacrifices.

Adding an investment property into the mix can help you go from ~19 years to <10 years, but you need careful planning, a solid expert, and reflection on how the property might impact your other strategies - because if it absorbs the cash you're putting towards fortnightly + offset/redraw, then you're becoming increasingly reliant on the investment paying off.

>Disclaimer: This post is being written on 15 May 2026, only 3 days after proposed government announcements around negative gearing, CGT changes, and incentives around investment property and favouring new builds. As I write this, these are proposals/discussions and not final law. Treasury, Parliament, the Senate, etc. still need to determine what is actually going to happens. So if you’re considering the investment property as part of a debt-reduction strategy, keep an eye on policy changes carefully so you know how to measure your 'exit point' based on costs.

We recently changed to a new broker, local to us (Qld) who was recommended by a few in the community. We met, felt comfortable, so went through the process of supplying documents etc and then when it came to requesting pre-approval, we were asked for a fee ($500) to cover her time to do this. This surprised us, our old broker (Vic) had never asked us to pay a fee (was a few years ago now!). Is this the new normal?

so i’m just confused the steps it takes to use the scheme to buy a house

do i save the deposit first then apply or find a house then save then apply?

please help

Hello, looking to buy my first home in the next 1-2 years. Will have $150-200k saved up for the deposit. Currently earning approx. $95k pa and will (hopefully) increase... I have a hecs debt of $16k left, would it affect my borrowing power much? Or should I pay it off this financial year? How much would I be able to borrow based on my current circumstances? I am in an industry that qualifies for LMI waiver if that means anything. Thank you!